{"title":"Vulnerable student digital well-being in AI-powered educational decision support systems (AI-EDSS) in higher education","authors":"Paul Prinsloo, Mohammad Khalil, Sharon Slade","doi":"10.1111/bjet.13508","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <section>\n \n \n <p>Students' physical and digital lives are increasingly entangled. It is difficult to separate students' <i>digital</i> well-being from their offline well-being given that artificial intelligence increasingly shapes both. Within the context of education's fiduciary and moral duty to ensure safe, appropriate and effective digital learning spaces for students, the continuing merger between artificial intelligence and learning analytics not only opens up many opportunities for more responsive teaching and learning but also raises concerns, specifically for previously disadvantaged and vulnerable students. While digital well-being is a well-established research focus, it is not clear how AI-Powered Educational Decision Support Systems (AI-EDSS) might impact on the inherent, situational and pathogenic vulnerability of students. In this conceptual paper, we map the digital well-being of previously disadvantaged and vulnerable students in four overlapping fields, namely (1) digital well-being research; (2) digital well-being research in education; (3) digital well-being research in learning analytics; and (4) digital well-being in AI-informed educational contexts. With this as the basis, we engage with six domains from the <i>IEEE standard 7010–2020</i>—<i>IEEE Recommended Practice for Assessing the Impact of Autonomous and Intelligent Systems on Human Well-Being</i> and provide pointers for safeguarding and enhancing disadvantaged and vulnerable student digital well-being in AI-EDSS.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <div>\n \n <div>\n \n <h3>Practitioner notes</h3>\n <p>What is already known about this topic\n\n </p><ul>\n \n <li>Digital well-being research is a well-established focus referring to the impact of digital engagement on human well-being.</li>\n \n <li>Digital well-being is effectively inseparable from general well-being as it is increasingly difficult to disentangle our online and offline lives and, as such, inherently intersectional.</li>\n \n <li>Artificial Intelligence shows promise for enhancing human digital well-being, but there are concerns about issues such as privacy, bias, transparency, fairness and accountability.</li>\n \n <li>The notion of ‘vulnerable individuals’ includes individuals who were previously disadvantaged, and those with inherent, situational and/or pathogenic vulnerabilities.</li>\n \n <li>While current advances in AI-EDSS may support identification of digital wellness, proxies for digital wellness should be used with care.</li>\n </ul>\n <p>What this study contributes\n\n </p><ul>\n \n <li>An overview of digital well-being research with specific reference how it may impact on vulnerable students.</li>\n \n <li>Illustrates specific vulnerabilities in five domains from the <i>IEEE standard 7010–2020</i>—<i>IEEE Recommended Practice for Assessing the Impact of Autonomous and Intelligent Systems on Human Well-Being</i> selected for their significance in online learning environments.</li>\n \n <li>Pointers for the design and implementation of fair, ethical, accountable, and transparent AI-EDSS with specific reference to vulnerable students.</li>\n </ul>\n <p>Implications for practice and/or policy\n\n </p><ul>\n \n <li>Fairness, equity, transparency and accountability in AI-EDSS affect all students but may have a greater (positive or negative) impact on vulnerable students.</li>\n \n <li>A critically informed understanding of the nature of students' vulnerability—whether as inherent, situational and/or pathogenic, as well as temporal/permanent aspects—is crucial.</li>\n \n <li>Since AI-EDSS can exacerbate existing vulnerabilities resulting in pathogenic vulnerability, care is needed when designing AI-EDSS.</li>\n </ul>\n </div>\n </div>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48315,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Educational Technology","volume":"55 5","pages":"2075-2092"},"PeriodicalIF":6.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/bjet.13508","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Educational Technology","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjet.13508","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Students' physical and digital lives are increasingly entangled. It is difficult to separate students' digital well-being from their offline well-being given that artificial intelligence increasingly shapes both. Within the context of education's fiduciary and moral duty to ensure safe, appropriate and effective digital learning spaces for students, the continuing merger between artificial intelligence and learning analytics not only opens up many opportunities for more responsive teaching and learning but also raises concerns, specifically for previously disadvantaged and vulnerable students. While digital well-being is a well-established research focus, it is not clear how AI-Powered Educational Decision Support Systems (AI-EDSS) might impact on the inherent, situational and pathogenic vulnerability of students. In this conceptual paper, we map the digital well-being of previously disadvantaged and vulnerable students in four overlapping fields, namely (1) digital well-being research; (2) digital well-being research in education; (3) digital well-being research in learning analytics; and (4) digital well-being in AI-informed educational contexts. With this as the basis, we engage with six domains from the IEEE standard 7010–2020—IEEE Recommended Practice for Assessing the Impact of Autonomous and Intelligent Systems on Human Well-Being and provide pointers for safeguarding and enhancing disadvantaged and vulnerable student digital well-being in AI-EDSS.
Practitioner notes
What is already known about this topic
Digital well-being research is a well-established focus referring to the impact of digital engagement on human well-being.
Digital well-being is effectively inseparable from general well-being as it is increasingly difficult to disentangle our online and offline lives and, as such, inherently intersectional.
Artificial Intelligence shows promise for enhancing human digital well-being, but there are concerns about issues such as privacy, bias, transparency, fairness and accountability.
The notion of ‘vulnerable individuals’ includes individuals who were previously disadvantaged, and those with inherent, situational and/or pathogenic vulnerabilities.
While current advances in AI-EDSS may support identification of digital wellness, proxies for digital wellness should be used with care.
What this study contributes
An overview of digital well-being research with specific reference how it may impact on vulnerable students.
Illustrates specific vulnerabilities in five domains from the IEEE standard 7010–2020—IEEE Recommended Practice for Assessing the Impact of Autonomous and Intelligent Systems on Human Well-Being selected for their significance in online learning environments.
Pointers for the design and implementation of fair, ethical, accountable, and transparent AI-EDSS with specific reference to vulnerable students.
Implications for practice and/or policy
Fairness, equity, transparency and accountability in AI-EDSS affect all students but may have a greater (positive or negative) impact on vulnerable students.
A critically informed understanding of the nature of students' vulnerability—whether as inherent, situational and/or pathogenic, as well as temporal/permanent aspects—is crucial.
Since AI-EDSS can exacerbate existing vulnerabilities resulting in pathogenic vulnerability, care is needed when designing AI-EDSS.
学生的物质生活和数字生活越来越紧密地联系在一起。鉴于人工智能越来越多地影响着学生的数字生活和线下生活,很难将两者分开。在教育承担着确保学生安全、适当和有效的数字学习空间的信托和道德责任的背景下,人工智能与学习分析之间的持续融合不仅为更有针对性的教学提供了许多机会,而且也引起了人们的关注,特别是对以前处于不利地位和弱势的学生而言。虽然数字福祉是一个成熟的研究重点,但人工智能驱动的教育决策支持系统(AI-EDSS)会如何影响学生固有的、情境性的和病因性的脆弱性,目前尚不清楚。在这篇概念性论文中,我们从四个相互重叠的领域,即(1) 数字福祉研究;(2) 教育中的数字福祉研究;(3) 学习分析中的数字福祉研究;(4) 人工智能教育背景下的数字福祉,来描绘以往处于不利地位和弱势的学生的数字福祉。在此基础上,我们参与了 IEEE 标准 7010-2020-IEEEE Recommended Practice for Assessing the Impact of Autonomous and Intelligent Systems on Human Well-Being 中的六个领域,并为保障和提高 AI-EDSS 中弱势和易受伤害学生的数字福祉提供了指导。人工智能在提高人类数字福祉方面大有可为,但也存在隐私、偏见、透明度、公平性和问责制等问题。"弱势个体 "的概念包括以前处于不利地位的个体,以及那些具有内在、情景和/或病因脆弱性的个体。虽然人工智能-教育与健康调查(AI-EDSS)的当前进展可能有助于识别数字福祉,但应谨慎使用数字福祉的替代指标。本研究的贡献概述了数字健康研究,特别提到了它可能对弱势学生产生的影响。说明了IEEE标准7010-2020--IEEE《评估自主和智能系统对人类健康影响的推荐实践》中五个领域的具体脆弱性,这些脆弱性因其在在线学习环境中的重要性而被选中。为设计和实施公平、道德、负责和透明的AI-EDSS提供了指导,特别提到了弱势学生。对实践和/或政策的启示人工智能教育与发展系统的公平、公正、透明和问责会影响到所有学生,但可能会对弱势学生产生更大的(积极或消极)影响。批判性地了解学生的弱势性质--无论是固有的、情境的和/或致病的,以及时间性/永久性的--是至关重要的。由于人工智能教育与发展系统可能会加剧现有的弱势,导致致病的弱势,因此在设计人工智能教育与发展系统时需要谨慎。
期刊介绍:
BJET is a primary source for academics and professionals in the fields of digital educational and training technology throughout the world. The Journal is published by Wiley on behalf of The British Educational Research Association (BERA). It publishes theoretical perspectives, methodological developments and high quality empirical research that demonstrate whether and how applications of instructional/educational technology systems, networks, tools and resources lead to improvements in formal and non-formal education at all levels, from early years through to higher, technical and vocational education, professional development and corporate training.